CONFIDENTIAL REPORT
God Image Inventory - 156 item test results for use by Jay Gattis ONLY
SubjectID = 77 TestID = 25
Test Administered on Mar 29, 2001 11:11 pm
| Scale | Raw Score | Standard Score = | (Raw Score - Standard Mean) / Standard Deviation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Presence: | 80 | 0.86 | (80 - 69.23) / 12.54 |
| Challenge: | 77 | 1.15 | (77 - 67.39) / 8.37 |
| Acceptance: | 81 | 1.01 | (81 - 71.52) / 9.42 |
| Benevolence: | 81 | 0.85 | (81 - 73.29) / 9.06 |
| Influence: | 74 | 0.68 | (74 - 65.93) / 11.93 |
| Providence: | 73 | 0.84 | (73 - 62.61) / 12.34 |
| Faith: | 44 | 0.86 | (44 - 37.98) / 7.01 |
| Salience: | 48 | 1.57 | (48 - 36.1) / 7.6 |
| Mean of Standard Scores | 0.98 |
Demographic and Research Data
Gender: Female
Age: 30-39
Ethnicity: Caucasian
Religion: Protestant
How often do you attend religious services? Every week or almost
Native English speaker? YES
This subject, like most respondents, left no blanks on the instrument.
This subject reports a total of:
- 102 4's
- 44 3's
- 8 2's
- 2 1's
Strongs (1's and 4's) v. Middles (2's and 3's)
The scoring of the Inventory awards
- 4 points for each positively worded item answered 'Strongly Agree,' and for each negatively worded item answered 'Strongly Disagree.'
- 3 points for each positively worded item answered ' Agree,' and for each negatively worded item answered ' Disagree.'
- 2 points for each positively worded item answered 'Disagree,' and for each negatively worded item answered 'Agree.'
- 1 point for each positively worded item answered 'Strongly Disagree,' and for each negatively worded item answered 'Strongly Agree.'
Responses Strongly Agree or Strongly Disagree are strong responses. Agree or Disagree are middle responses. A respondent who reaches a score of 10 with two 4's and two 1's obviously is in a different place than a respondent who reaches the same score with two 3's and two 2's.
Using these numbers, your other tests reports and clinical observations, you will want to weight your interpretation of the reported scores in light of the respondent's tendency to feel strongly or not strongly about most things, and the possible influence of this tendency on reported scores.
This average of this subject's standard scores is 0.98.
Demographic and Research Data
Gender: Female
Age: 30-39
Ethnicity:
Caucasian
Religion: Protestant
How often do you attend
religious services? Every week or almost
Native English speaker?
YES
This subject, like most respondents, left no blanks on the instrument.
This subject reports a total of:
102 4's
44 3's
8 2's
2 1's
Strongs (1's and 4's) v. Middles (2's and 3's)
The scoring of the Inventory awards
- 4 points for each positively worded item answered 'Strongly Agree,' and
for each negatively worded item answered 'Strongly Disagree.'
3 points for each positively worded item answered ' Agree,' and for each negatively worded item answered ' Disagree.'
2 points for each positively worded item answered 'Disagree,' and for each negatively worded item answered 'Agree.' and
1 point for each positively worded item answered 'Strongly Disagree,' and for each negatively worded item answered 'Strongly Agree.'
Responses Strongly Agree or Strongly Disagree are strong responses. Agree or Disagree are middle responses. A respondent who reaches a score of 10 with two 4's and two 1's obviously is in a different place than a respondent who reaches the same score with two 3's and two 2's.
Using these numbers, your other tests reports and clinical observations, you will want to weight your interpretation of the reported scores in light of the respondent's tendency to feel strongly or not strongly about most things, and the possible influence of this tendency on reported scores.
This average of this subject's standard scores is 0.98.
General Background: Although each of the six clinical scales has its own potential significance for your understanding of this respondent, there is a high level of coherence among the scales, a sort of halo-effect for God, which makes the average of these six scale scores a good place to begin your interpretation.
In interpreting this average and the individual scores, it should be kept in mind that the statistical norms on which this analysis is based have been validated only for U.S. Christians. Interpretations for members of other religions should be based more on clinical judgment than on the numbers in this report.
Comparison to norm: This average score is somewhat higher than the statistical norm. While this score could be the result of either generic or religious enthusiasm, or of socially desirable responses, most people who score in this range turn out to be pretty healthy, both religiously and personally.
This subject's Presence score is 0.86.
General Background: The Presence scale is, from the theoretical perspective, the most fundamental of the six clinical scales, since is measures the most basic question, 'Is God there for me?' Persons with a good score on this scale show a good basis for subsequent personal and religious development. Persons with weak scores on this scale can often benefit from psychological and spiritual assistance to accept reality (God, the universe, other people) as basically available and trustworthy. This scale is closely related to the Influence and Providence scales, making any large deviation among these three scores worth noting.
Comparison to norm: This score, 0.86, is somewhat above average. It may be that this person is simply more enthusiastic in response style, or more fervent in religious style, than most other people. But more likely is the possibility that this person has a fairly strongly reliable sense of God's presence, often accompanied by images of other significant figures as available, and a healthy self image. This asset should be used in dealing with whatever problems are presented.
This subject's Challenge score is 1.15.
General Background: The Challenge scale complements the Presence scale, both reflecting the issue of belonging. If Presence measures God as a safe haven, Challenge measures God as a secure base. The issue is "How much does God want me to grow? How far can I venture out on my own and still find God there when I get back?" Persons with a good score on this scale will generally have experienced parent figures as enablers more than controllers, and envision God the same way. Persons with extreme scores on this scale suggest very dependent or very independent personalities, respectively. This is the most statistically independent of the six clinical scales. While it does participate in the "halo-effect" for God, it is not closely related to any other scale in particular.
Comparison to norm: This score, 1.15, is significantly above the average score. Unless this results from response style, this person suggests a notably stronger sense than the average person of the responsibility for personal initiative, growth and achievement that their relationship with God both enables and demands. This can be considered a resource in dealing with whatever problems the client presents.
Comparison to all scales (minimum/maximum): Note that this score is this person's highest score of all the clinical scales. This may not be significant in itself, but combined with other observations it may suggest a strong drive for achievement, and/or a fiercely independent personality.
Comparison to related scales: Since the Challenge scale is the most statistically independent of the six clinical scales, there are no predictable correlations to examine. Nonetheless, the clinician should look at the pattern of scores in light of other tests and clinical observations for possible hypotheses.
This subject's Acceptance score is 1.01.
General Background: The Acceptance scale is the first of two scales measuring the fundamental questions of goodness. Goodness here does not mean moral goodness, the rightness or wrongness of some past or present deed, but ontological goodness, the fundamental quality that makes a person capable of and deserving of love. The Acceptance scale answers the primitive, foundational question 'Am I good enough to be loved?' Specifically, the question concerns God, 'Am I good enough for God to love?', but the score here usually also reflects the subjects perceptions of early experiences: 'Am I good enough for (Mom, Dad, etc.) to love?' Persons with high scores on this scale usually experienced early primary caregivers as loving, and believe that God and other persons in general should be able to love them. Persons with low scores here tend to perceive themselves as unlovable, and have generally low self-esteem, which is conformed by a relatively high correlation (.54) between this scale and the Rosenberg self-esteem Scale.
Comparison to norm: This score, 1.01, is significantly above the average score. Unless this results from response style, this person suggests a notably stronger sense than the average person of intrinsic lovability. This can be considered a resource in dealing with whatever problems the client presents.
This subject's Benevolence score is 0.85.
General Background: The Benevolence scale is designed to reflect the converse of the Acceptance scale. Acceptance asks 'Am I good enough for God to love?' Benevolence asks 'Is God the sort of person who would love me?' In practice, the two scales have turned out to be closely related (r=.90). Persons who score high on this scale have an image of God as a person who is characterized by strong, unbounded, unconditional love.
Comparison to norm: This score, 0.85, is somewhat above average. It may be that this person is simply more enthusiastic in response style, or more fervent in religious style, than most other people. But it is equally likely that this person simple has a pretty good level of self-esteem and is projecting it onto God.
Comparison to related scales: see the comments under Acceptance.
This subject's Influence score is 0.68.
General Background: The Influence scale is the first and more fundamental of the two control scales. It measures the answer to the question 'How much control do I have?' This active voice control may sound disrespectful when addressed to God, 'How much can I control God?', but the question is psychologically fundamental, and closely related to 'How much control do I have over the world, over my life? How much will important others listen to me? Does anyone, does the world, care what I think or what I need?' The normative study for this scale produced a fairly normal curve of distribution with a much more modest number of respondents maxing out here than on the Presence scale, yet the Presence and Providence scales are closely related to this scale (r=.94,.90). Persons with high scores on this scale will tend to feel that they are listened to, and that they have a good level of control over their lives.
Comparison to norm: This score, 0.68, is somewhat above average. It may be that this person is simply more enthusiastic in response style, or more fervent in religious style, than most other people. But also likely is the possibility that this person has a somewhat stronger than average sense of their ability to control reality, especially as it impacts their lives. This can be a useful asset in therapy.
Comparison to all scales (minimum/maximum): Note that this score is this person's lowest score of all the clinical scales. This may suggest that felt lack of influence or control is a dominant issue for this client.
This subject's Providence score is 0.84.
General Background: The Providence scale measures the answer to the question 'How much control does God have over me?' Since God is rarely seen as malevolent, this can be re-phrased as 'How much can I rely on God take care of me?' This scale is closely related in concept to the Influence scale, and closely related psychometrically to the Presence and Influence scales. Persons scoring high on this scale perceive God, and, by implication, reality as a whole and especially other key people in their lives as willing and able to take care of their needs.
Comparison to norm: This score, 0.84, is somewhat above average. It may be that this person is simply more enthusiastic in response style, or more fervent in religious style, than most other people. But it is equally likely that this person has experienced reality, particularly parent figures, to be reliable in caring for their needs. This can make a therapeutic alliance easier to establish.
This subject's Faith score is 0.86.
General Background: The Faith scale is the first of two control scales which are reported in addition to the six clinical scales. These scales do not report a dimension of the subject's God image. Instead they provide supplementary information designed to help the clinician interpret the role of that image in the client's life. The Faith scale answers the question 'How much does this person believe that the God just described actually exists?' Persons with a high score on this scale have a strong belief that God exists, and is the sort of person they have described in the clinical scales of this inventory.
Comparison to norm: This score, 0.86, is somewhat above average. It may be that this person is either a little more enthusiastic in response style, or more a little more fervent in religious style, than most other people. Either might slightly elevate clinical scores, but probably is not of great influence.
This subject's Salience score is 1.57.
General Background: The Salience scale is the second of the two control scales. It measures the client's response to the question, 'How important is my relationship to this God that I am describing in my life?' Persons with a high score on this scale attach a high level of importance to their relationship with God.
Comparison to norm: This score, 1.57, is a very high score, close to the maximum possible score. Either this person is very religious and very fervently so, or is giving indiscriminately pro-religious responses. If clinical evaluation rules out fanaticism, prospects for religiously based approaches to therapy are encouraging.
Comparison to related scales: Note that this person's Salience score, 1.57, is somewhat higher than the average of their clinical scores, 0.98. This client may be more fervent, or simply more perplexed than the average. Clinical exploration of the sources of this phenomenon should be a priority.
| QID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Q001 | 1 | |
| Q003 | 4 | |
| Q006 | 4 | |
| Q019 | 1 | |
| Q021 | 1 | |
| Q033 | 4 | |
| Q035 | 1 | |
| Q039 | 4 | |
| Q040 | 3 | |
| Q042 | 3 | |
| Q043 | 3 | |
| Q044 | 1 | |
| Q058 | 3 | |
| Q096 | 2 | |
| Q115 | 4 | |
| Q123 | 4 | |
| Q125 | 2 | |
| Q127 | 1 | |
| Q128 | 2 | |
| Q132 | 1 | |
| Q135 | 3 | |
| Q150 | 1 | |
| Presence Scale Standard Score = 0.86 |
80 |
| QID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Q007 | 4 | |
| Q008 | 1 | |
| Q013 | 1 | |
| Q014 | 4 | |
| Q027 | 1 | |
| Q028 | 2 | |
| Q049 | 3 | |
| Q052 | 3 | |
| Q054 | 3 | |
| Q057 | 2 | |
| Q062 | 2 | |
| Q066 | 4 | |
| Q079 | 4 | |
| Q089 | 4 | |
| Q093 | 1 | |
| Q094 | 4 | |
| Q099 | 2 | |
| Q103 | 3 | |
| Q116 | 2 | |
| Q129 | 3 | |
| Q145 | 4 | |
| Q151 | 1 | |
| Challenge Scale Standard Score = 1.15 |
77 |
| QID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Q004 | 1 | |
| Q015 | 1 | |
| Q018 | 4 | |
| Q020 | 4 | |
| Q022 | 2 | |
| Q030 | 4 | |
| Q032 | 4 | |
| Q034 | 2 | |
| Q037 | 4 | |
| Q046 | 1 | |
| Q051 | 3 | |
| Q055 | 1 | |
| Q063 | 1 | |
| Q084 | 4 | |
| Q085 | 4 | |
| Q090 | 1 | |
| Q110 | 3 | |
| Q134 | 4 | |
| Q138 | 4 | |
| Q141 | 2 | |
| Q153 | 1 | |
| Q156 | 1 | |
| Acceptance Scale Standard Score = 1.01 |
81 |
| QID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Q010 | 1 | |
| Q029 | 3 | |
| Q045 | 4 | |
| Q050 | 3 | |
| Q053 | 4 | |
| Q059 | 3 | |
| Q071 | 3 | |
| Q080 | 1 | |
| Q081 | 4 | |
| Q082 | 1 | |
| Q095 | 1 | |
| Q107 | 1 | |
| Q109 | 4 | |
| Q114 | 3 | |
| Q118 | 1 | |
| Q133 | 4 | |
| Q136 | 4 | |
| Q137 | 1 | |
| Q144 | 1 | |
| Q147 | 4 | |
| Q154 | 2 | |
| Q155 | 1 | |
| Benevolence Scale Standard Score = 0.85 |
81 |
| QID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Q005 | 3 | |
| Q017 | 2 | |
| Q031 | 3 | |
| Q036 | 1 | |
| Q047 | 1 | |
| Q056 | 1 | |
| Q067 | 2 | |
| Q068 | 4 | |
| Q072 | 3 | |
| Q075 | 1 | |
| Q078 | 1 | |
| Q083 | 1 | |
| Q086 | 3 | |
| Q088 | 1 | |
| Q091 | 4 | |
| Q097 | 3 | |
| Q120 | 3 | |
| Q131 | 1 | |
| Q143 | 2 | |
| Q146 | 4 | |
| Q149 | 4 | |
| Q152 | 1 | |
| Influence Scale Standard Score = 0.68 |
74 |
| QID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Q011 | 4 | |
| Q012 | 4 | |
| Q023 | 3 | |
| Q025 | 3 | |
| Q048 | 3 | |
| Q064 | 1 | |
| Q065 | 1 | |
| Q069 | 4 | |
| Q070 | 1 | |
| Q074 | 1 | |
| Q076 | 3 | |
| Q087 | 4 | |
| Q092 | 3 | |
| Q104 | 2 | |
| Q106 | 1 | |
| Q119 | 3 | |
| Q122 | 2 | |
| Q124 | 4 | |
| Q126 | 1 | |
| Q130 | 3 | |
| Q139 | 2 | |
| Q140 | 1 | |
| Providence Scale Standard Score = 0.84 |
73 |
| QID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Q009 | 4 | |
| Q016 | 4 | |
| Q026 | 2 | |
| Q041 | 2 | |
| Q060 | 4 | |
| Q098 | 4 | |
| Q100 | 1 | |
| Q105 | 1 | |
| Q112 | 4 | |
| Q121 | 4 | |
| Q142 | 2 | |
| Q148 | 2 | |
| Faith Scale Standard Score = 0.86 |
44 |
| QID | Question | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Q002 | 1 | |
| Q024 | 4 | |
| Q038 | 4 | |
| Q061 | 1 | |
| Q073 | 4 | |
| Q077 | 1 | |
| Q101 | 1 | |
| Q102 | 4 | |
| Q108 | 4 | |
| Q111 | 1 | |
| Q113 | 1 | |
| Q117 | 4 | |
| Salience Scale Standard Score = 1.57 |
48 |
|
|
|
|